Poinciana Elementary cell tower issue will be revisited

Ellen Goldman, a 9-year resident of Coachman's Glen and president of the residents association, believes the erection of a 75-foot cell tower on the Poinciana Elementary School campus, just 150 feet from her property line, was streamlined to get a $24,000 annual contract from the cellular company for the lease of the land. Put simply, she questions whether the potential adverse health impact on 700 students is worth $24,000.

William DeShazer/Staff
The new cell tower sits adjacent Poinciana Elementary School in the school's parking lot on Wednesday Aug. 28, 2013.

Collier County School Board members at a Tuesday meeting vowed to take another look at the controversial 75 foot cellphone tower installed at Poinciana Elementary School this summer.

Board members and Superintendent Kamela Patton responded to demands for removal made by about 15 concerned citizens at the school board meeting during public comment after the information item had been addressed on the agenda.

For now, the tower is not operational and won't be activated before winter break in December, officials said.

As such, the board agreed to conduct research into potential hazards of radiation from the tower and discuss the cell tower when it convenes for its Oct. 15 meeting in Immokalee. Board members determined the October meeting would be held in Immokalee, as one board meeting is held annually in the community, during an organizational meeting last November.

Ellen Goldman, who lives near and opposes the tower, said the public comment seemed to have an impact on board members, particularly Pat Carroll, board vice chairwoman, who said she was told the PTA had approved the tower's construction.

Carroll could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Goldman also said Patton appeared to "change her tune."

"She spoke last meeting and she said, ‘The tower is here to stay, we don't break our contracts and it's not coming down,'" Goldman said. "Last night she said, ‘Well, yes, we're going to have to revisit it and do more research.'"

District spokesman Joe Landon clarified that Patton said there was a contract in place that the district could not just "undo," but she has never changed her stance, which is to listen to community members and make an informed decision.

"Dr. Patton never stated that the cellphone tower decision would not be reversed," Landon said in a statement. "What was said at the end of the meeting (was) that the district would look into the issue carefully, welcomed additional information and input, and would hold a follow-up meeting."

During Tuesday's meeting, district representatives outlined options for mitigating parent and neighbor concern over the tower, including a $200,000 plan to relocate its position on campus to the parking lot, and a $350,000 estimate to have it removed. That estimate, officials said, does not include fees that could be incurred during litigation for breach of contract with the cell tower service provider leasing the land.

Goldman believes the tower was pushed through without proper notice and the district now has to answer for decisions it made without public input. One point of contention has been the initial claims by the district that the School Advisory Committee at Poinciana approved installation of the tower. Goldman says the minutes prove no vote took place, whereas Landon says the committee can express consent without a vote. Votes are only held twice a year, Landon said, for approving the School Improvement Plan and deciding how to spend the A+ money received from the state.

"Most of their meeting items are informational or deal with school business that does not require a vote," he wrote. "The cell tower discussions were informational, but the SAC minutes from the May 2011 meeting did state there were no objections after a representative from Sprint came to discuss some of the concerns raised earlier."

Goldman said once community members were made aware of the tower, they were stifled at each turn.

"It's a rubber stamp organization, that's what it is. And the principal was instructed not to allow discussion," Goldman said. "They kept this a secret from the parents and teachers for three years, that's the bottom line."